Jump to content

Browns trade for Jarvis Landry


bosko1616

Recommended Posts

Just now, freakygeniuskid said:

You people really don't get opportunity cost, do you? Because we got Landry, we now have no shot at better receivers like Robinson, Watkins, or even mid tier guys like Lee or Richardson.

No one is upset at having Landry on the roster. People are upset because of the cost both in draft picks (two picks and I will sadly bet that our 3rd this year is one) and in money (probably 13M AAV). Not because we don't want the money spent but because there were much better players out there to spend it on.

some people(YOU) don't understand that you are going to have to over pay any of them to come here as well.  I will reserve judgement on the pick part until it is announced.  People want pryor back but didn't we offer him best deal last yr and he still said no?  Just because you want something doesn't mean you are going to get it.  Bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush.  Also lets be real here, we can go sign another wr if we really want to as we still have a boat load of $$$ to spend.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, freakygeniuskid said:

No one is saying he's bad. We are saying that he is slightly above average but his raw stats make him look really good because of sheer quantity. And that we are paying for him as if those raw stats are the whole story, as well as that he just isn't a great fit for our current offensive scheme (vertical heavy offense) or personnel (Duke can do almost the exact same job for cheaper).

Gordon has great vertical ability if he can stay out of trouble. Coleman also possesses great vertical ability if he can stay healthy. I disagree that Duke can do "almost the exact same job for cheaper", he can't, and doesn't. Jarvis Landry is one of the best in the NFL in the slot. Duke Johnson is not. Duke Johnson is a very good receiver for a RB, but is not close to Landry in terms of receiving. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bosko1616 said:

Complains about not making a move. Dorsey makes a move. People are complaining saying we didn’t need to make this move lol 

Pretty sure none of the anti-Landry camp have been complaining about us not trading picks away for cap casualties.

I just don't see how this move isn't available in a couple of weeks once we've seen what we can do in FA.

The only scenarios in which this makes ANY sense in my mind:

1. We've had hush-hush talks with every FA WR and none of the half decent ones are even listening.
2. We're going hard after Cousins and he said he wanted improved weapons before thinking about it.
3. We're planning to can Hue and Haley within the year and the preferred successor (and preferred 1st round QB) is a mainly short area passer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tyler735 said:

Gordon has great vertical ability if he can stay out of trouble. Coleman also possesses great vertical ability if he can stay healthy. I disagree that Duke can do "almost the exact same job for cheaper", he can't, and doesn't. Jarvis Landry is one of the best in the NFL in the slot. Duke Johnson is not. Duke Johnson is a very good receiver for a RB, but is not close to Landry in terms of receiving. 

Landry is "one of the best in the NFL in the slot" ONLY in raw size of numbers. In things like yards created per route run he's not much better than Duke at all. And it's not like we can know about the ultimate answer to what Duke could do in Landry's role because Hue never freaking uses him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, freakygeniuskid said:

You people really don't get opportunity cost, do you? Because we got Landry, we now have no shot at better receivers like Robinson, Watkins, or even mid tier guys like Lee or Richardson.

No one is upset at having Landry on the roster. People are upset because of the cost both in draft picks (two picks and I will sadly bet that our 3rd this year is one) and in money (probably 13M AAV). Not because we don't want the money spent but because there were much better players out there to spend it on.

You are right, what on  Earth could be accomplished with our remaining 100 million of cap

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, big poppa pump said:

Not saying I would be thrilled....but do you think we could get a WR at pick 65 that will match his production?

See, this is the wrong question. The right question would be, could we use 15 MILLION #$%&ing dollars per year AND the #65 pick to get a receiver better than Landry. And IMO, I think that's a clear answer (send 17M AAV at Robinson and tell me he's not signing).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, freakygeniuskid said:

Pretty sure none of the anti-Landry camp have been complaining about us not trading picks away for cap casualties.

I just don't see how this move isn't available in a couple of weeks once we've seen what we can do in FA.

The only scenarios in which this makes ANY sense in my mind:

1. We've had hush-hush talks with every FA WR and none of the half decent ones are even listening.
2. We're going hard after Cousins and he said he wanted improved weapons before thinking about it.
3. We're planning to can Hue and Haley within the year and the preferred successor (and preferred 1st round QB) is a mainly short area passer.

The trade wouldn't have been there because Miami needed to make the move to clear up FA money so they wanted to make a deal before hand.  Would have made one whether it was with us or not...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...